The Cupertino company, despite having a stacked, high-power litigation team likely settled with HTC in part because HTC is struggling in sales and isn't much of a threat. Now it may regret cutting a relatively reasonable deal with the Asian OEM, as it may look unfair and uncooperative to the judge and jury, should it reject a similar statement by Samsung.

The document in question has been labeled "Attorneys-Eyes-Only", so it is unlikely the media will get their hands on the exact licensing details; particularly after Samsung was already admonished in the last round for allegedly leaking Apple court filings to the press.

An injunction hearing will be held on Dec. 6, at which point a California district judge will decide on whether to temporarily ban U.S. sales of Apple's iPhone 5 and/or Samsung's Galaxy S III, in addition to other Samsung "Jelly Bean" products.

"No imagine you own shop A, and across the street is shop B.And at the end of the drive is shop X. Now, how would you feel if you're business was told to stop selling by shop X, because what you're selling is killing his business, and only he can sell his product. Yet at the same time you see shop owner X and shop owner B making a deal over the same product he's tried to get you to stop selling. You're the one obviously never run a business. Because ANY businessman worth his salt would be demanding to see the content of the deal between X and B."

Exactly... I would only add - If Apple wants to keep the courts out of its business than Apple should STOP involving the courts in its business. Plain and simple.

LOL. Can you imagine having so little of a life that you actually take the time to create an email address, then a new ID just to add zero to the debate? Now he has done it several times to me, you and reclaimer...